Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 11:07:45 -0700 From: David Schultz <das@freebsd.org> To: Michael Sierchio <kudzu@tenebras.com> Cc: security@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Removable media security in FreeBSD Message-ID: <20030610180745.GA16845@HAL9000.homeunix.com> In-Reply-To: <3EE5EF0A.7060703@tenebras.com> References: <20030608080429.GA234@hhos.serious.ld> <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1030608115332.67632D-100000@fledge.watson.org> <20030610103830.GC14407@HAL9000.homeunix.com> <3EE5EF0A.7060703@tenebras.com>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Tue, Jun 10, 2003, Michael Sierchio wrote: > David Schultz wrote: > > >FAT is somewhat less robust than UFS. ... > > That is possibly the most subtle funny thing I have read > all day. "An orange crate is somewhat less robust than > a Humvee" is how I read that. :-) In this case, I was referring specifically to bugs in our present implementation, not to the filesystem itself. The overall design certainly deserves stronger words.home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030610180745.GA16845>